Coal transport within mines classified as transportation service, not mining service, making the tax demand unsustainable.

Transportation of coal within a mining area, even with incidental loading, was treated as transportation service rather than mining service under the Finance Act, 1994. Applying sections 65A and 66F, the activity was held not to fall within service in relation to mining of mineral, oil or gas under section 65(105)(zzzy), because its essential character was the movement of coal. The conclusion was supported by Singh Transporters and Ambey Mining Pvt. Ltd., which held that transport inside mines does not become mining service merely by occurring within the mining area. On that basis, the service tax demand was unsustainable, and the related interest and penalty also failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether transportation of coal within the mining area with incidental loading is classifiable under mining services or transportation services, and whether the demand of service tax, interest, and penalty could survive.

Analysis: The scope of the work orders showed that the appellant was engaged in transportation of coal within the mines. Applying the principles of service classification under sections 65A and 66F of the Finance Act, 1994, the activity was held to be more appropriately classifiable as transportation service and not as service in relation to mining of mineral, oil or gas under section 65(105)(zzzy) of the Finance Act, 1994. The conclusion was supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in Singh Transporters and by the Tribunal's earlier view in Ambey Mining Pvt. Ltd., both holding that transportation of coal within mining areas does not become mining service merely because it occurs inside the mines.

Conclusion: The demand of service tax under mining services was unsustainable and was set aside. As the tax demand did not survive, the interest and penalty demands also failed and were set aside.

---